Most bridges here do, and often when one needs to be demolished and rebuilt, the military blows it up just for practice.
Edit: Source for the sceptics
The deep demolition, which became a central element in Finnish post-war demolition tactics, and especially the development of readiness to counter surprise attacks that emerged as a threat scenario in the 1960s, received significant support immediately after the wars. The decision concerning structural demolition preparations for bridges was made on January 15, 1946. These preparations meant building charge wells, charge chambers, charge pipes, and charge hooks. Authorities responsible for constructing bridges were required to include the aforementioned structures in their plans, which significantly improved the readiness to destroy the bridges.
If it was not possible to place the charge space inside the abutment or pier, charge hooks could be embedded in the supports during the casting phase, to which the charges could then be attached.
Oh I can't say I know if the hooks are for demolition. But I mean the military should have the explosives and know-how to raze a bridge even without drilled holes, like with shaped charges.
Yeah sure, they do, ofc. Hell, the military has literally vehicles that become bridges in case someone else has blown up a bridge.
My point is that I often found in the military that things are ultimately done because they make sense. (And I don't want a bunch of people here complaining about making their beds, discipline, cleanliness and uniformity does have a purpose.)
I just think these hooks seem be really close to each other and I only found articles talking about charge "pits", but someone did link a Finnish thing where they said "panoskoukku" so could very well be and I'm not arguing against it anymore.